Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-15 Joint Board Packet ft, glwater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA Meeting Notice Stillwater Township and City of Stillwater Joint Board Meeting City of Stillwater Council Chambers 216 North Fourth Street I ' Stillwater MN 55082 Wednesday, September 15, 1999 7 p.m. 1 X° Roll Call: Dave Johnson, Louise Bergeron, Jay Kimble, Terry Zoller ' AA- 5o ipel Approval of Minutes: September 1, 1999. - A° - Jo Agenda 1 kretik Agenda Items: / . 1. Case No. CPA/99-1. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment changing the land use designation of 28 acres of land located east of CR 15 and north of 62nd Street from single family large and small lot (2-4 du/acre)to attached single family(6 du/acre). The Pemtom Land Company, applicant. 2. Case No. ZAM/99-1. Zoning Map Amendment for the 28 acres located east of CR 15 and north of 62nd Street from AP (Agricultural Preservation) to TH (Townhouse). The Pemtom ] Land Company, applicant. - -, 3. Case No. PUD/99-8. A Planned Unit Development for a 142 unit cluster development and a ) 49(.04 4.8 acre park on 28 acres. The Pemtom Land Company, applicant. .„------- 4. Case No. SUB/99-9. A subdivision of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the Bergmann Property for 142 Townhome lots and common area and 4.8 acre park on 28 acres. The Pemtom Land h/144(4 .4 Company, applicant. r. — 5. Referral of annexation reluest o : • and 8260 Neal Avenue from City Council to Joint Board for comment. "a•-.-17. ---- --wierai:jiit4 6. Other Business. . ,s4mr, - r ; CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 651-430-8800 .; • Stillwater Township and City of Stillwater Joint Board Meeting September. 1, 1999 Present for Stillwater Township: Supervisor David Johnson and Supervisor Louise Bergeron Present for City of Stillwater: Mayor Jay Kimble and Council Member Terry,Zoller Others: Tim Kuntz, arbitrator A partial list of others in attendance is attached; it should be noted that not everyone signed in. Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. He provided a brief overview of the request for the Comp Plan change that resulted in a 2-2 vote of the Joint Board and the City of Stillwater's decision to initiate the process of arbitration. He explained the evening's procedures and noted any decision-making would be done at the Sept. 15 Joint Board meeting. Background presentations: Tom Simonson, assistant city manager and community development director, City of Shoreview, gave a presentation on how Shoreview evaluates such requests, including the review process; criteria used in review — consistency with the overall goals and objectives of the Comp Plan, impact on services, traffic and surrounding properties; factors to consider—whether the land use is consist with community values, whether the change meets a community need, whether there has been a change in values or demographics, and whether there are sufficient zoning standards in place to address concerns. He also briefly discussed several tools the City uses, such as multiple or dual land use designations when appropriate and designating policy development areas to achieve more specific objectives and expectations for sensitive areas. Ed Otis, Stillwater Township, asked Mr. Simonson whether the community set its own criteria/values. Mr. Simonson responded that the Metropolitan Council is involved, but generally they are reflective of the individual community values. Mr. Otis asked if Shoreview has ever denied a requested Comp Plan change;Mr. Simonson responded in the affirmative. Patrick Peters, Metropolitan Council sector representative, briefly reviewed how Met Council reviews city/town Comprehensive Plans as they reflect the critical assumptions in the Council's "blueprint for regional growth" and how communities intend to address the regional growth strategy objectives for their community. The Council's regional growth policy maps define the urban/rural edge to the year 2040. Stillwater is identified as an urban area; land in an urban service area should be used to maximize/optimize the regional infrastructure. The maps also identify urban reserve areas and permanent rural areas. Mr. Peters also noted that the City of Stillwater is a participant in the Livable Communities program and as such is committed to providing a full range of affordable and life cycle housing. There was a question raised about the Met Council's map identifying a portion of Stillwater Township north of Highway 96 as urban reserve. Township Planner Meg McMonigal noted the Township's revised Comprehensive Plan, approved earlier that week by the Met Council, identifies the area north of Highway 96 as permanent rural and said that Met Council will be revising its maps based on the updated Comp Plans;Mr. Peters said that is correct. 1 Stillwater Township and City of Stillwater Joint Board Meeting September. 1, 1999 Michael Munson, Metropolitan Council demographer, provided charts of growth projections for Washington County, age forecast and housing demand forecasts. John Rheinberger, Stillwater Planning Commission member, asked how accurate the forecasts are. Mr. Munson readily admitted that forecasts aren't always accurate; accuracy is not the main point,he said, the primary purpose is to monitor and respond to changes. Ed Otis, Stillwater Township, asked when the charts were prepared. Mr. Munson said most are as current as 1998. Mr. Otis noted that the City of Stillwater submitted its Comprehensive Plan and was given Met Council approval in 1996 at which time it met regional as well as local needs. He questioned whether projections for Stillwater had changed noticeably since 1996. Steve Russell, Stillwater Community Development Director, reviewed what has been going on since the adoption of the Comp Plan and some of the essential elements of the plan. Land use maps accompany the plan, he said, and most policies relate to the land use maps. The Comp Plan is closely related to the Orderly Annexation Agreement which involved extensive community participation. The Joint Board oversees development in the annexation area, and he noted the Joint Board had approved several Comp Plan amendments including 10 zoning ordinance amendments, the adoption of a greenways/trail plan, and the 62nd Street Planning Area. He further noted that the City has not been seeing the magnitude of growth that would be allowed by the Orderly Annexation Agreement—480 units would have been allowed, while there have been 71 units to date. The Bergmann property, the site of the proposed development, is in phase 4 of the Orderly Annexation Agreement, but Mr. Russell noted, properties can be annexed earlier if 100 percent of the property owners petition for annexation. The Comprehensive Plan is a living document, an ongoing process, he said, not a 20-year contract. The request would change the density of the area proposed for development from 3 units per acre as indicated in the Comp Plan to slightly over 5 units per acre — from 84 single-family units to 142 attached units. Mr. Russell sated the requested change was not initiated by the developer, but by the City to complete the Long Lake neighborhood plan. He said there are guideposts in the Comp Plan which identify attached housing sites and one of those sites is 62nd Street near County Road 15. Jerry Hicks, Stillwater Township supervisor,referred to the Comprehensive Plan which stated there were 105 acres remaining in the existing City limits which were considered residential, including 308 attached housing units. He asked how much of that property had been developed since adoption of the plan and how much had been developed as attached housing. Mr. Russell said he did not have that exact information,but said there was a 20-unit attached housing development by the Courage Center and some duplexes by Tuenge Drive. Mr. Hicks suggested that would indicate there are sites for 275 attached housing units within the former City limits, outside of the annexation area. Mr. Kimble suggested that Mr. Russell provide updated Stillwater 2 Township and City of Stillwater Joint Board Meeting September. 1, 1999 information, noting that things clearly have changed, referring to the former UBC site in downtown which was identified as a possible multi-family site and is now a parking lot. Ed Otis, Stillwater Township, said the City's AUAR calls for an environmental worksheet to be completed for each property to be developed; air quality and other issues have not been addressed, he said, and he questioned whether those issues should be brought back to the AUAR technical committee. Mr. Russell responded that it is the City's determination that the attached housing development will have less impact, e.g. less impervious surface, than anticipated in the AUAR. Mr. Otis also asked whether there had been any consideration given to the historical use of the land and questioned whether there is anything historic about attached housing. Meg McMonigal, Township planner, reviewed the Township's concerns. The proposal begins to change the west-east rural to urban transition, as called for in the Comp Plan/Orderly Annexation Agreement. The Comprehensive Plan is a legal public document that provides a legal basis for land use decisions, and the Township believes the City should implement the Comp Plan as it was developed for the area in question. The Township's reasons for opposing the proposal include: change in land use concept; increase in density and units; unclear visual impacts; concern about how the development will fit into the overall vision/land use along County Road 15 which is a transitional edge from rural to urban; using cost of utility hook-ups and other factors a a driving force for development. Further, Ms. McMonigal said with future changes, such as potential development of the Gadient and Schmoeckle properties, the Township would ask that the City step back and take an overall look at the annexation planning area, rather than take a piecemeal approach to changes to the Comp Plan. Mr. Kimble challenged Ms. McMonigal's definition of the Comprehensive Plan as a public legal document; it's a "living document," he said, subject to change. Ms. McMonigal agreed that the plan isn't a contract, but is a public document with legal ramifications. Mr. Kimble also questioned where the west/east transition is stated. Mr. Kimble noted that the proposed average rear setback of 65 feet from Manning Avenue more than doubles the current transition. He also noted that the Bergmann proposal is predicated on saving the large wooded area on the Gadient property, and the Brown's Creek area designated as single-family housing has been purchased by the City for natural/open space use, asking how the Township could oppose those changes. Ms. McMonigal reiterated the Township is concerned about changes to the County Road 15 corridor and density. In response to Mr. Kimble, Jeny Hicks, Township Board supervisor, stated the City's greenway/trails plan clearly identifies a 100-200-foot corridor along County Road 15 to preserve the natural/rural area. Public Hearing on Bergmann proposal: • Review of City boards/commissions involvement Mr. Russell reviewed the impact of developing the Bergmann property as townhomes vs. single family in regard to number of homes; impervious surface;building cover; lineal feet of streets; 3 Stillwater Township and City of Stillwater Joint Board Meeting September. 1, 1999 number of buildings; number of buildings adjacent to County Road 15 and 62nd Street; rear setback from Manning Avenue; park dedication; population; traffic impact and number of school age children. He noted that the City has adopted a 100-foot setback requirement for County Road 15, Highways 96 and 12 and portions of McKusick Road, and the plans will be modified to reflect that. He further noted that the proposed development augments the mix of housing in the annexation area and contributes to the goals of the Livable Communities program. Roger Tomten, former chair of the City's Heritage Preservation Commission, stated in addition to serving on the HPC, he was involved in the neighborhood network in developing the Comprehensive Plan and assisted the City in developing specific design guidelines for the annexation area. The intent of the design guidelines, he said, is to create uniquely designed neighborhoods through parks and open space, connecting trail systems, a hierarchy of pedestrian travel and streets that are comfortable to pedestrian travel. The intent is to build neighborhoods with a balance of housing,jobs (which would be available at the campus R&D designated area next to the Bergmann property) and services (a commercial property at 12/15 and the Rutherford school). He spoke in favor of the proposal as an important piece of the Long Lake neighborhood to provide a balance of housing, shopping,working, playing and going to school. John Baer, acting chair of the City's Open Space Committee,briefly reviewed the history of that group. He said that in March of 1998, the group was charged with reviewing the Long Lake wooded area, to check on the availability of the Gadient property, to develop an open space and trail plan from the Gadient woods to Long Lake and minimize impacts of development on wooded areas. He said what attracted the Open Space Committee to the Bergmann proposal is that it provides a 5-acre active park in the center of the development and 2.7 acres of natural/open space versus the approximately three acres of park land dedication that would be required if the property were developed as single-family. He said the hope is that providing the 5-acre park for active recreation uses to serve the area will allow the City to acquire/preserve the Gadient woods for passive use. Jerry Fontaine, chair of the City's Planning Commission, noted that Planning Commission approval was "no slam dunk." The Planning Commission's view is how a development will fit into the larger community. What the Township can't provide, the City should, he said, and this kind of housing fits into that category. He also stated that in his involvement in the Comprehensive Plan/Orderly Annexation Agreement, he recalled the urban/rural transition as moving from south to north, not east to west. He noted that the Bergmann property is adjacent to Trunk Highway 36, next to a campus research/development designated area and the increasingly busy County Road 15;the proposed townhome development would seem to be the best use of the land, he concluded. In response to Mr. Fontaine, Mary Kauffer, currently a Stillwater resident, asked why the townhouse designation wasn't incorporated in the original Comp Plan if it's such a great idea. 4 Stillwater Township and City of Stillwater Joint Board Meeting September. 1, 1999 She asked that.some credibility to lent to the efforts of those involved in the Comp Plan/Orderly Annexation Agreement process and have the properties phased in as indicated in the plans. • Presentation by developer Dan Herbst of Pemton Land Company stated he thought his plan was a well laid out and well landscaped plan. He introduced Tom Hart, land use lawyer; Mary Louise Poquette, demographer/consultant; and John Uban, a third party planner. Tom Hart said the issue is not whether Pemton's is a good proposal, it's an issue between those who think it is a forward-looking proposal and those who think the City entered into a contract of sorts in the Comprehensive Plan. Pemton's plan has evolved significantly over the course of many months and the developer has tried in every respect to do what is right and jump through every hoop. He said the first time a negative vote was received was at the meeting of the Township Planning Board, a meeting to which the developer was not invited. He stated Mr. Herbst was proud of the plan and proud of the way it was developed. John Uban stated things change in regions and Comp Plans are being amended to reflect those changes. Nationwide, he said, communities are facing issues of sprawl. Without reasonable, efficient planning in urban areas, there will be sprawl. He talked about "smart growth," growth taking place in the right places. Smart growth, he said, includes life cycle housing and a mix of housing choices in every neighborhood. He suggested that the Joint Board look at the AUAR to determine whether the change is appropriate to consider, and he also reviewed the "positive" impact of the townhome development versus single-family use. He also addressed some issues regarding the Manning Avenue corridor and landscaping methods; he suggested the proposed development would be a"good beginning"to that corridor. Mary Louise Poquette, demographer/planner, provided statistics showing the "dramatic rise" in the cost of real estate and the lack of affordable housing ($150,000 or less) available in the Stillwater market today. The area is ripe for better choices in housing, she stated. Dan Herbst concluded the developer's presentation by noting that the west-east rural/urban transition might be appropriate in some places. However, in this instance, commercial activity is already present, an the effects of density increase would be negligible. He stated his development proposal exceeds any expectations regarding the provisions of trails and parks and creative placement of units. • Township comments: Ms. McMonigal reiterated the concern that if a lot of change has occurred to compel a change in the Comp Plan, that the change be part of an overall plan, rather than a piecemeal approach. She also noted that the Gadient property is not tied to this request. Why does density increase help save the woods? she asked. Ms. McMonigal restated the position that the cost of utility extensions not be a reason for a land use change. And, she stated that a land use change would 5 Stillwater Township and City of Stillwater Joint Board Meeting September. 1, 1999 not guarantee affordable housing. She again said if enough changes have occurred, the City should take a step back and do some proactive planning,not piecemeal changes. In response to Ms. McMonigal's comments, Mr. Herbst said when they looked at the Bergmann property,the only connection made between that property and the Gadient property was where to put an active park, and it made more sense to put the active-use park on the Bergmann property. Mr. Russell noted there is not enough information/experience to come forward with more extensive changes to the Comprehensive Plan at this time; change is difficult without specific requests, he said. Ed Otis suggested that the Gadient woods is being used to rationalize the Bergmann property development. • Public testimony: Jerry Hicks, Stillwater Township supervisor, said a lot of time and money was spent in development of the City's Comprehensive Plan, and without the Comprehensive Plan there would not have been an Orderly Annexation Agreement. In discussions regarding the Comprehensive Plan, he said he remembered discussions regarding the transition area and comments that residents be able to drive along County Road 15 without feeling they were in the City. He referred to the City's Greenway Plan which calls for a 100-200-foot greenway of native, indigenous plantings accommodating existing topographical conditions along County Road 15; a 10-foot high berm, as proposed, is not a natural condition, he said. He appealed to the Joint Board and arbitrator to look closely at what the intention of the Comprehensive Plan/Orderly Annexation Agreement was. The requested change is not in the best interest of the Township, he concluded. Sandy Fundingsland, Stillwater Township Planning Board member, strenuously objected to Mr. Hart's comments regarding the Town Planning Board's decision. She stated the Town Planning Board had been left out of the loop on the project; there was never an exclusion of Mr. Herbst. She further stated that if township residents have been able to vote on annexation, "we wouldn't be here tonight."There is not community consensus representing the township, she said, "we feel like we've been invaded." Paul Harmon, Stillwater Township Planning Board member, stated he was "offended" by Mr. Hart's statements characterizing the Board's actions as "unscrupulous." Regarding comments about urban sprawl and that townhomes would be better according to AUAR impacts, why not build all townhomes?he asked. He also stated that this development does not meet the definition of cluster housing and does not belong on the Bergmann property. He stated the Comprehensive Plan will accommodate this type of housing elsewhere. Ed Otis, Stillwater Township resident, stated the Orderly Annexation Agreement is "all about money" — to broaden the City's tax base. He noted that when the Met Council approved the Comprehensive Plan, it already addressed multi-family housing need located throughout the annexation area. He stated there is no need for a five-acre park if there is enough parkland in the 6 Stillwater Township and City of Stillwater Joint Board Meeting September. 1, 1999 Legends/Liberty developments, and the parcel was not even identified by the City's Open Space Committee as a priority parcel. He stated changing the land use would be of no benefit to the Township at all and represents"not even half an attempt to honor the agreement." George Bergmann, property owner, said his family has lost two members in the recent past and something has to be done with the property. The Bergmanns are 100 percent in favor of the plan, and he expressed the family's hope that the City and Township can get together and approve the project. Marc Hugunin, Metropolitan Council representative and resident of the city of Grant, noted there are growth and development issues everywhere. He stated his hope that the issue would be • decided on policy rather than process. He noted there is a shortage of 100,000 housing units for people with below average incomes. The free market does a good job of providing housing styles for those with high incomes, not so good for those with below average incomes. People in need of such housing are our kids and our parents, he said. He spoke in favor of approval, calling the proposal a good use of the property and a good development. As a resident of Grant, he did agree that the County Road 15 buffer is an issue. Mr. Johnson thanked those in attendance for their comments and patience. He adjourned the meeting at 12:05 a.m. Respectfully submitted, Sharon Baker Recording Secretary 7 Joint Board Meeting Sign Up Sheet 09/01/99 Sign Up Sheet Name Address Telephone Number JoRa 15AEg. Sr-z- O-ro Ave.s. ST(LlwAT(K 661- 430 -312.5 "R--' 1BJ 1 l°) s. A Fes- s r• S n uw�+rr-1t 44::.N!" �9• 's4�z- SS l-�+.►�•Tw,vr,� 1 ISc• w ��vrtt.L u S�:l�lw 't3' BOG I -J -( P-cc.rs oktoagroF.7e3P0JGE1 .. t1-30 "a ' - tAilsac--ichievisi IN tp'ilc R...,5n4t&c-rtJ.. 544(GArriIc +30- 3S-I S' .•t�Stn J/ N A4Is 1P 44, Ssc. 7 - dett./ ,r-1L 2 Ire........ %.sA c.,\;.n S+ S4.\k. •, 1131- Tclo`r 0 k44 / 11, 7 s------ia7t7) ,stnl,s h-tr -hop LI_3 o —g-ev 1-7 Sheila-Marie U j-ed1 19z4c UC1t of kr 43Ci -(it 4__ ro I e. 0110 10'35q /Y)a n n„i' f(ll.t.A1.i 541 II,oc - Vl 39 -7 81 4mtscc l (Vat-0 mel ootid i ) `1I I-r r--�za- ,4-S V960 gN Ot t 1 t.41ritam 7 iwzt. 66-/ - Y37- Vac, . P fAcrek^ 3(o Sts No fx (Y, o (nxs7— '/30 --9,1"01.J'— awl wNa 31 9560 PewAge. 4'.e k• 6)57' Wei"Z 4.. tA6.+_ rtta 14"- /Lb CO to 2 ,c 720 60"- `f34Y–cA3o 0 L 1. `CJh ta07o 2774 St, G11,• P 6s/- 11.45-SO g)? ?Au! on N 3044 RelloasEw Pe. Lu.13.L. 4. ./- 770 -z98/ "Sob L+•% av,w $ 13 Irv. Ol i Kc Sf. 54(11.4, �(�S I) AL3 ct K ( �19 '7.•,c0 c 9^1 w r a41-17 a 1�Pc AsT• pi,sr--ate • Weal Laurie. friatt ' 30f 8 et ri‘o.e C►'r ck 93f- 7/0 - vt._0_Jay • . 451 X02— ) S3 pA-7.,w G -T�...t-C L- / C-/ a J `/417 MEMO To: Mayor and City Council y� From: Steve Russell, Community Development Director Subject: Annexation Petition for Phase IV City Expansion Area Site Date: September 2, 1999 The City received a request to annex two parcels of land in the Phase IV expansion area. Both property owners are petitioning the City. The City Council is authorized to accept the annexation petition according the Orderly Annexation Agreement. As a courtesy to the Joint Stillwater City/Township Planning Board,the Council has referred such request to the Joint Board for comment. Also, as part of the annexation, the properties would have to be rezoned and subdivided. The annexation request can accompany the rezoning and subdivision request when those items come back to the Council for the Planning Commission. Recommendation: Refer request to Joint Planning Board and Planning Commission PETITION FOR ANNEXATION This Petition is made this 12 day of August 1999, by Daniel L. Thron and Janice L. Thron, husband and wife, ("Throns"), and Mitchell T. McKenzie and Alice Charlene McKenzie ("McKenzies"), husband and wife, ("Owners"). 1. Property. The Throns are owners of Lot 1, Block 3, Neal Meadows, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder of Washington County. The McKenzies are owners of Lot 2, Block 3, Neal Meadows, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder(the"Property"). 2. Adjacency. That the Property of the Owners is now within the Town of Stillwater and is adjacent to and shares a border with the City of Stillwater (the "City"), all in Washington County, Minnesota. 3. Orderly Annexation. That Section 4.09 of the Agreement between the City of Stillwater and the Town of Stillwater for Growth Management, Orderly Annexation and the Exercise of Joint Powers for Planning and Land Use Control, dated August 16, 1996 (the "Orderly Annexation Agreement") allows owners of property adjacent to the City the Petition for Annexation of their property to the City. 4. Request. The Owners therefore hereby petition the City for annexation of their property to the City pursuant to Section 4.09 of the Orderly Annexation Agreement. Dated: g- CD 20N , 1999 - CDCh-,.t, ,� - �' & (fir/-VG1 VL Daniel L. Thron yttUte• JaniceJ,. Thron Mitchell T. McKenzie i‘ egat.A^ : /7(-7-7,A.'7_4" Alice Charlene McKenzie Property to the City all as provided by Subdivision 1 of Section 414.0325 of the Minnesota Statutes relating to orderly annexations within a designated area. 2. For the purpose of this annexation proceeding, the City Council hereby determines that the Property is now or about to become urban and the City is capable of providing the services required by the area within a reasonable time. It is further determined that the annexation of the City would be in the best interests of the Land. 3. After the annexation, the real estate taxes with respect to the Land will be divided as provided by Section 7.03 of the Joint Resolution. BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED, that a map with the land proposed for annexation designated thereon in writing, will be marked as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution and submitted to the Minnesota Municipal Board along with a certified copy of this Resolution. BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk submit copies of this Resolution with copies of the map to the Town Board of the Town of Stillwater and the Joint Powers Committee. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 7th day of September, 1999. CITY OF STILLWATER Jay L. Kimble, Mayor ATTEST: Morli Weldon, Clerk 2